(January 6, 2016 at 11:40 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(January 6, 2016 at 10:12 pm)Old Baby Wrote: I can 100% fathom it.  I'm not an unthinking idiot and for many years I was a theist.  The notion that everyone who believes in God is an unthinking idiot is one of the most ignorant ideas going around in the atheist community.  My conclusion was just as set in stone as any believer's, but things changed for me and I moved to a different conclusion.  It happens.

I can respect that completely.

But are you 100% sure you were ever a true xtian, Old Baby?


[j/k]

(January 7, 2016 at 6:55 am)robvalue Wrote: If I find out someone is a theist, then I assume their method of arriving at that conclusion is probably faulty. 

I don't really think of what led them to be religious as faulty empiricism or cosmology.  Ones religious beliefs are not what one ends up with at the end of a long and fruitful search for what can be found in the world.  Religious beliefs arise as a result of what one believes is true about their experience phenomenologically.  Faulty empirical conclusions are just an unfortunate by product, though it is mostly the literally inclined fundies whose objectivity suffers the most.  Those theists who accept religious beliefs allegorically are more likely to remain capable of maintaining an agnostic stance toward dogma.

(January 7, 2016 at 11:31 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(January 7, 2016 at 6:55 am)robvalue Wrote: They have the opportunity to be a lovely person such as CL, KP and Deidre, or they can waste it by being a judgemental prick who says I'm simply wrong and evil and preaches bullshit at me.

I take it you mean me by that?

(January 8, 2016 at 5:02 am)robvalue Wrote: No, I didn't. I wasn't referring to anyone in particular with the second part. I'm sorry if you thought I meant you.

No you're not judgmental, MK.  Your reasoning sometimes seems clouded to me in the way you allude to when describing your difficulty in giving other belief systems a fair shake.  But you've never struck me as being anything but respectful toward others.

Oh shit. I think I may have left you off my list of party invitees on that other thread. I'd definitely want you there. (I knew it was a mistake to try to make a comprehensive list but tried to anyway. Gad, wonder who else I left off.)

(January 6, 2016 at 11:15 am)jcvamp Wrote: What's your opinion on why people are religious?

I think it's purely emotional. I think people can't cope with the idea of not knowing how the world works, so they cling to some kind of explanation that they can make sense of. They fear death, and can't cope with the idea of not existing in some form. The prospect that their life has no greater meaning is depressing.

I think that's why logic doesn't work. Logic doesn't give a religious person the same comfort that their religion gives them. Their religion is like a warm comforter that tells them they will live on after death. It tells them that there's a higher power who think they're special and has a plan for them.

What do you think?

It is not an "opinion" as to why people are religious. There is a literal real scientific reason as to why humans gap fill. Biological life has evolved to pattern seek, unfortunately, at the same time, because life also had to make quick decisions in fight or flight, it also caused life to make bad guesses. 

The antelope on the African plane does not always have time to slow down and assess if the tall swaying grass is mere wind, or a lion stalking it. God belief is literally like walking into a spotless clean glass door. My cat has a ritual where he wipes his paws on the counter before he drinks the water out of his bowl. God belief is no different than convincing the kid in a dark room at a Halloween party that the covered bowl of olives are eyeballs.

Humans were ignorant and scared so when nature hurt them, they falsely assumed that that bigger power had human qualities like them. It is why humans created storm gods, and volcano gods, and still today why modern polytheistic and monotheistic religions still persist, it is lack of understanding of evolutionary psychology. It is also why new agers and even si fi wooers create their own gap filling explanations.

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins explains why humans make up god claims. Victor Stenger's "New Atheism" explains that all religions have the same arguments for kind motifs and arguments from wisdom, but he says that should tell humans something. His argument is that our species ability to be cruel or compassionate, is not in our labels, but in evolution itself.

The word for god claims is "anthropomorphism". Projecting human qualities on non human things. God claims and religions exist, not because humans need it, but because of our species flawed perceptions. The dinosaurs didn't pray to Buddha. Cockroaches didn't pray to Allah. Bacteria doesn't pray to Vishnu.

There were no organized religions 200,000 years ago, much less 4 billion years ago, much less 14 billion years ago. This planet's core will burn out of energy and our sun will die as well, and we will go extinct and the universe will continue with no record of our species human invented myths.

Unfortunately when you state that reality, believers stupidly accuse you of not valuing life, being fatalistic. Far from the case. You can go to a movie knowing it will end, but you still go. You go to a music concert knowing it will end, but you still go. You go to a sporting event knowing it will end, but you still go. Life for the realist, skeptic, atheist also has it's ups and downs. We'd simply argue that reality has good and bad in it, but we can do better as a species by not clinging to old myths.

(January 8, 2016 at 9:31 am)Whateverist the White Wrote: No you're not judgmental, MK.  Your reasoning sometimes seems clouded to me in the way you allude to when describing your difficulty in giving other belief systems a fair shake.  But you've never struck me as being anything but respectful toward others.

Thank you for your kind words. And other forums and on my specific own faith forum, I always go out of my way to emphasize not all Atheists are destined to hell or are dishonest to themselves. I go out of my way to show Shias for example, they can still be believers in whatever guidance of God has come to them and be submitting to whatever they know to be true of their nature.

I make statements of possibilities of being dishonest here, because I feel if that is the case, people should combat that. But contrary to what people might think and always assume, I never assume any specific individual has been dishonest about the issue to themselves.

I think Atheists are more honest then most religious people in general.

Even though I may sometimes emphasize on human condition, that we don't accept proofs and what not, I think Atheists are more intellectually honest to themselves then most religious people.

That said I've made it clear that I do believe Atheists can make it to heaven and I've clarified the stance of Quran on musta'afeen (those who the proof of God and his religion has not come to them so as to have power to have faith in it or disbelieve in it).

I personally believe most Atheists are musta'afeen as in the case of people of most religions. If there was one people who I don't think are excused it's Sunni scholars who are aware of proofs of Ahlulbayt but reject them. That is to say nothing of the Sunni masses though.

(January 8, 2016 at 9:40 am)MysticKnight Wrote: If there was one people who I don't think are excused it's Sunni scholars who are aware of proofs of Ahlulbayt but reject them. That is to say nothing of the Sunni masses though.

I take it Sunni scholars are no true muslims? 

(January 8, 2016 at 9:49 am)Whateverist the White Wrote:

(January 8, 2016 at 9:40 am)MysticKnight Wrote: If there was one people who I don't think are excused it's Sunni scholars who are aware of proofs of Ahlulbayt but reject them. That is to say nothing of the Sunni masses though.

I take it Sunni scholars are no true muslims? 

They are Muslims in the Shariah sense and in the general sense and must be treated as such, and some of them are sincere, but a lot of them go out of their way to hide things from the masses (like the narration of the two weighty things, Quran and family of Mohammad). That said,  I never judge a specific scholar either. I just think most of them are dishonest about this issue but I don't claim to know this either. Sunni Sufis of a certain type, their scholars are an exception, that I have much respect to.

(January 8, 2016 at 9:40 am)MysticKnight Wrote:

(January 8, 2016 at 9:31 am)Whateverist the White Wrote: No you're not judgmental, MK.  Your reasoning sometimes seems clouded to me in the way you allude to when describing your difficulty in giving other belief systems a fair shake.  But you've never struck me as being anything but respectful toward others.

Thank you for your kind words. And other forums and on my specific own faith forum, I always go out of my way to emphasize not all Atheists are destined to hell or are dishonest to themselves. I go out of my way to show Shias for example, they can still be believers in whatever guidance of God has come to them and be submitting to whatever they know to be true of their nature.

I make statements of possibilities of being dishonest here, because I feel if that is the case, people should combat that. But contrary to what people might think and always assume, I never assume any specific individual has been dishonest about the issue to themselves.

I think Atheists are more honest then most religious people in general.

Even though I may sometimes emphasize on human condition, that we don't accept proofs and what not, I think Atheists are more intellectually honest to themselves then most religious people.

That said I've made it clear that I do believe Atheists can make it to heaven and I've clarified the stance of Quran on musta'afeen (those who the proof of God and his religion has not come to them so as to have power to have faith in it or disbelieve in it).

I personally believe most Atheists are musta'afeen as in the case of people of most religions. If there was one people who I don't think are excused it's Sunni scholars who are aware of proofs of Ahlulbayt but reject them. That is to say nothing of the Sunni masses though.

MK once again, there is no Hell, and there is no Heaven. We get you want the story to end neatly in a perfect pretty bow. No, other religions also have their afterlife motifs. The Egyptians did too. Native Americans do. Even Chinese and Japanese have superstitions about ancestor spirits. There is no afterlife, just like you did not exist before you were born 1 billion years ago. The universe was not put here for humans, nor is earth special to the universe.

Now again, accepting that reality is not doom and gloom. You can still find happiness, still have your ups and downs, and still know that their is good in life, without assigning it to old books or superstitions. We promise nothing bad will happen to you if you accept that this is the one life you get. The only thing that will change is the relief you will feel when you realize you don't have to defend unscientific books written by scientifically ignorant humans. And again, we make the same arguments to Jews and Hindus and Christians too. 

The only downside to giving up on god claims will be the reaction to those still stuck in it. But as far as being tortured forever for leaving a religion or picking the wrong club, the good news is, there is no Hell to burn in.

(January 8, 2016 at 9:40 am)MysticKnight Wrote: That said I've made it clear that I do believe Atheists can make it to heaven and I've clarified the stance of Quran on musta'afeen (those who the proof of God and his religion has not come to them so as to have power to have faith in it or disbelieve in it).

Thanks for inviting us to your little club.  Not my scene, but I appreciate the thought, lol.

(January 8, 2016 at 9:55 am)Rhythm Wrote:

(January 8, 2016 at 9:40 am)MysticKnight Wrote: That said I've made it clear that I do believe Atheists can make it to heaven and I've clarified the stance of Quran on musta'afeen (those who the proof of God and his religion has not come to them so as to have power to have faith in it or disbelieve in it).

Thanks for inviting us to your little club.  Not my scene, but I appreciate the thought, lol.

That verse in Quran is a foundation. Had it not been in there,  I would question, why would God not emphasize general mercy to the people who didn't have power to reject faith or accept it? Those who the proof didn't come to them? 

It would show major flaw in the book, if it didn't emphasize on it. That said, it doesn't prove it to be from God, but to me personally, had the emphasis not been there, I would not believe in the Quran and it would be proof that an essential perception to this issue was not clarified.

To me, the Quran is easily falsifiable because it's attributed to the most perfect intelligence and needs to be without flaw. That said I once upon a time believe there were many flaws. I don't think at that time, I was denying the truth I knew, but rather following what I thought to be true to the best of my ability.